Thakur, Ramesh
ChandraThe United Nations, Peace And Security: From Collective Security To
The Responsibility To Protect
Cambridge University Press, 2006.

KFT1430.A7A44 2005

This book is written from the unique vantage point of an academic and an Assistant Secretary-General. The author provides a fresh insight into the changing role and structure of the United Nations when preventing humanitarian atrocities has becoming as important for the United Nations as dealing with inter-state war. He examines the transformation in UN operations, questions why, when and how force may be used. He argues that the growing gulf between legality and legitimacy is evidence of an eroded sense of international community. He considers the tension between the United States and the UN as the tension between one entity with great capacity to use force and one being the center of international law enforcement. At the end he asserts the importance of the rule of law and of a rules-based order with UN as the foundation of a civilized system of international relations, so UN can become a more effective instrument for responding to both 'soft' and 'hard' security threats.

The authors examine thousands of judicial votes to analyze the influence of ideology on judicial decisions. Focusing principally on the federal courts of appeal where judgments are made by a panel of three politically appointed judges, the authors scrutinize decisions on some of the most controversial issues in American law and politics such as abortion, affirmative action, campaign finance regulation, disability discrimination, environmental protection, and gay rights by focusing on these key questions: Do judges appointed by Republican presidents consistently vote differently from their colleagues who were appointed by a Democrat? When are those differences most stark and predictable? And to what degree are judicial votes affected by the ideological leanings of other judges on the same panel? Interestingly, the authors find that, even in the most controversial cases, Republican and Democratic appointees agree more than they disagree. When the judges do disagree, however, the analysis of who votes how (and under what circumstances) can be quite illuminating and tells a great deal about human nature as well as politics and justice in America. At the end the authors that judges do adhere to the law, but where the law is not plain, political convictions clearly play a role.

Thomas Alexander Aleinikoff, David A. Martin, Hiroshi Motomura; selected
by Immigration And Nationality Laws Of The United States: Selected Statutes,
Regulations, And Forms: As Amended To May 16, 2005,
Thomson/West, 2005.